BLR-SFO 18-hour flight proposed

[seanpodge]

One has to ask why?

That length of flight can only be torture. Not good for the legs and body, not good for the mind. Surely 2 x 9 hour flights with a 1 hour transit on the ground would be more ideal?

No obvious midpoint really. The mid point for the most direct route looks like it's in Siberian Russia, according to GCMap.

While not even close to half way, playing around with GCMap shows that stopping at PEK would only add about 200 miles to the distance. If AI could sell tickets for both BLR-PEK and PEK-SFO sectors, then they could have a winner.

 

[SeatBackForward]

They should stopover in Seattle.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

playing around with GCMap shows that stopping at PEK would only add about 200 miles to the distance.

I noticed that when looking at fares and connections from BLR-SFO. Air China offers a connection via PEK with a total journey time of just over 20 hours. AI fares would have to be pretty competitive to attract business.

 

[Austman]

One has to ask why?

That length of flight can only be torture. Not good for the legs and body, not good for the mind. Surely 2 x 9 hour flights with a 1 hour transit on the ground would be more ideal?

Even in a decent J seat that is not gonna be fun.

I've done SIN-EWR and EWR-SIN non-stops. They were somewhat famous for being the longest non-stops until SQ discontinued them. Around 19 hours. I must say that both flights were among the most pleasant flights I have ever taken. Sure it was SQ J-class but even so, the huge number of hours at cruising altitude meant that you could properly sleep, relax, eat, go for a stroll etc etc - it was so much easier than 2 flights that had all the disruption and process involved with landing, transit. boarding, takeoff etc etc.

Try it first! I thought it would be horrid. It was actually really good!

 

[SeatBackForward]

I've done SIN-EWR and EWR-SIN non-stops. They were somewhat famous for being the longest non-stops until SQ discontinued them. Around 19 hours. I must say that both flights were among the most pleasant flights I have ever taken. Sure it was SQ J-class but even so, the huge number of hours at cruising altitude meant that you could properly sleep, relax, eat, go for a stroll etc etc - it was so much easier than 2 flights that had all the disruption and process involved with landing, transit. boarding, takeoff etc etc.

Try it first! I thought it would be horrid. It was actually really good!

The horrendous aspect of this is not the length of flight, but the carrier involved.

 

[Dr Ralph]

I've got no problem with the length of the flight as long as they don't pack the plane to capacity.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The horrendous aspect of this is not the length of flight, but the carrier involved.

You have obviously, unfortunately, had a bad experience with Air India. But I have had the opposite. I can't, for the price or advertised offering, fault them too much. They delivered pretty much what they said they would.

 

[Austman]

The horrendous aspect of this is not the length of flight, but the carrier involved.

I didn't read that from the 2 that I quoted. They seemed to say that the journey was simply too long and it wouldn't matter even if it was J class.

Even SQ J-class, while good, is nothing very fantastic. But the flights were very easy to do.

 

[Foreigner]

I didn't read that from the 2 that I quoted. They seemed to say that the journey was simply too long and it wouldn't matter even if it was J class.

Even SQ J-class, while good, is nothing very fantastic. But the flights were very easy to do.

Such long flights take toll on crew too. I'm certain they have rest areas and likely 2 sets of crew.

 

[SeatBackForward]

I didn't read that from the 2 that I quoted. They seemed to say that the journey was simply too long and it wouldn't matter even if it was J class.

Even SQ J-class, while good, is nothing very fantastic. But the flights were very easy to do.

Sorry I was referring to AI, not the flights you mentioned.

 

[SeatBackForward]

You have obviously, unfortunately, had a bad experience with Air India. But I have had the opposite. I can't, for the price or advertised offering, fault them too much. They delivered pretty much what they said they would.

Have had quite a few flights with them, in Y and J, international and domestic, most before the Indian market opened up to other carriers. Last experience was in 2012.

Quite surprised that still exist given the quality of other Indian carriers, but then AI is government subsidised - most likely there to keep the jobs for the boys gravy train rolling.

 

[seanpodge]

I noticed that when looking at fares and connections from BLR-SFO. Air China offers a connection via PEK with a total journey time of just over 20 hours. AI fares would have to be pretty competitive to attract business.

True, but CA J would hardly be like EK, CX, SQ, et al. If the PEK route were to happen, AI would mainly be competing with Chinese and similarly mediocre US airlines, so while they would still have to watch their prices, they mightn't need to go with razor thin profit margins.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

...but then AI is government subsidised - most likely there to keep the jobs for the boys gravy train rolling.

But also stability and continuity of service to many airports (at least domestically).

The private airlines chop and change routes, cherry pick some, drop others, and even go bankrupt (Kingfisher). Through all of that, Indian Airlines, (and now Air India) provide a pretty much guaranteed service.

 

[TomVexille]

This may not be as silly as it sounds. India's IT hub to SFO/Silicon Valley makes a bit of sense to me.

 

[SeatBackForward]

But also stability and continuity of service to many airports (at least domestically).

The private airlines chop and change routes, cherry pick some, drop others, and even go bankrupt (Kingfisher). Through all of that, Indian Airlines, (and now Air India) provide a pretty much guaranteed service.

True, but its only been recently that air travel has become affordable for the masses, courtesy of the LCCs and competition.

Before that only the elite, wealthy or well connected would fly domestically. Other forms of transport have always been there for everyone else.

 

[JohnK]

Try it first! I thought it would be horrid. It was actually really good!

Long flights are not my favourites. I would rather 2 x 5 hour flights regardless of class of travel than a direct 9.5 hour flight. Came back from HKG 2 weeks ago on a QF 747 flight in First seat and started looking at the time left with ~4.5 hours to go. Nodded off a few times and when I woke up had ~1 hour to go.

I have only been across the Pacific 3 times and it is one flight I do not look forward to at all. I did LAX-SYD with QF in economy 25 years ago and that was a long flight. It was also a full flight. I was also much younger and that year was my first year of flying. Then in 2007 did SYD-LAX with QF in economy and woke up with ~7 hours still to go. Not fun. Not much better 2 years later SYD-LAX with QF but this time in premium economy seat.

 

[Foreigner]

Long flights are not my favourites. I would rather 2 x 5 hour flights regardless of class of travel than a direct 9.5 hour flight. Came back from HKG 2 weeks ago on a QF 747 flight in First seat and started looking at the time left with ~4.5 hours to go. Nodded off a few times and when I woke up had ~1 hour to go.

I have only been across the Pacific 3 times and it is one flight I do not look forward to at all. I did LAX-SYD with QF in economy 25 years ago and that was a long flight. It was also a full flight. I was also much younger and that year was my first year of flying. Then in 2007 did SYD-LAX with QF in economy and woke up with ~7 hours still to go. Not fun. Not much better 2 years later SYD-LAX with QF but this time in premium economy seat.

My preference is long flights. I can't recall watching movie. Rather, sleep.

Transits are not necessarily within hours. Ms. F has just landed in SIN and her next flight to ZRH is at 01:20 so she's got to kill 7+ hours

 

[Austman]

I would rather 2 x 5 hour flights regardless of class of travel than a direct 9.5 hour flight.

I used to think the same and might still agree for shorter long haul flights. But I have changed my mind for the real long hauls. I've been to New York many times. And the 19+ hour flight from SIN was by far the best way to get there from the other side of the world. It's different to the many non-stop AUS-USA flights I've done too. They are mostly quite a bit shorter. SQ offered full meal service after take off and before landing. And the 15 or so hours in between was service on demand. So 15 or so hours where nothing much happened unless you asked for something. It was great. 15 hours of peace and quiet (for a plane).

Here I was more than an hour after take-off from SIN and still worried that it would the flight from hell! Only 18:15 hours to go!

 

[anat0l]

I used to think the same and might still agree for shorter long haul flights. But I have changed my mind for the real long hauls. I've been to New York many times. And the 19+ hour flight from SIN was by far the best way to get there from the other side of the world. It's different to the many non-stop AUS-USA flights I've done too. They are mostly quite a bit shorter. SQ offered full meal service after take off and before landing. And the 15 or so hours in between was service on demand. So 15 or so hours where nothing much happened unless you asked for something. It was great. 15 hours of peace and quiet (for a plane).

Here I was more than an hour after take-off from SIN and still worried that it would the flight from hell! Only 18:15 hours to go!

I did the SIN/EWR flight once, not too long before it was withdrawn from service. It's not the easiest flight to do, even if you are in Business (or First) Class. The main take away points I would have are:

• Ensure you manage your time and plan around the time zones (i.e. when you leave and when you arrive). I'm not saying follow traditional jet lag advice, but since you are up in the air (removed from "ground reality") for a long time, it's important to manage those expectations.
• Keep hydrated. No, this doesn't mean keep drinking Champagne. The plane is very dry; in premium cabins, even more so. The longer you are up in the air, the longer you are in the very dry environment, and the more important it is to keep hydrated in order to ensure you don't get sick.

I've also done my fair share of Europe/Asia flights (which are usually in the vicinity of 11-13 hours) in both Economy and premium classes, and also done DFW/SYD, which is a good 15 hours or so. The latter I did in J; again, it was important to drink plenty of water and overuse moisturisers. The timing of the flight made it somewhat easier to appreciate getting a decent amount of sleep on the flight. Also, the QF snacks were in general better than SQ's snacks.

The EK flight, something which many Indians who are travelling between India and Silicon Valley are likely on, between DXB and west coast USA are pretty long and pushing some limits on the longest flights in the world (depending on various measures). DL has a flight between JNB and ATL which is non-stop in one direction.


For a flight which is predisposed for some sleep, i.e. overnight, I find it easier if the flight is longer and not shorter. This is why PER red-eyes back to the East coast are punishing, even if you manage to nod off nearly straight away until landing (and for me, that is nearly impossible - I'd be lucky to get 3 hours on PER/BNE, even after refusing the meal services). Ditto for some intra-Asia red-eyes, such as BKK/ICN or HKG/ICN. Even something like BKK/NRT, timed at about 5-6 hours, is not easy.


I think the main selling point for AI starting this route would be the non-stop ability. Maybe they also have lots of corporate travel tied up on that (I wonder what those companies do for travel right now?), and the native population would likely fly their own carriers (they may have a questionable international reputation, but until they are killing people through accidents and negligence, they'll still fill planes with at least the natives). If AI stop along the way, they would almost be no better than any other option that could connect Bangalore and Silicon Valley; for example, the ME3, which are vacuuming up the traffic between North America and India like no tomorrow (if we are to believe the main opposing lobby in the United States).

How do people bear an 18 hour flight, especially in Economy? I guess there are ways to do it. 18 hours in a tube in Y and I probably wouldn't be ready to jump into a meeting straight away at the other end, unless my life depended on that meeting (and so I was probably working on the plane). My legs would probably need a good rub and woe betide anyone who hasn't heeded any anti-DVT advice. I'm not sure many people outside of this forum have considered many ramifications of travelling for more than 12 hours, apart from some conceding that it's a necessity at times. All I can say is that if an 18 hour flight runs out of drinking water at any time, that's a recipe for disaster (perhaps literally).

Given AI is part of Star Alliance, maybe UA (or even AC) might like to jump on this as a possibility to further tap into the USA to India market which at least the former is apparently struggling to make good market share on (if their rhetoric against the ME3 is to be believed).

 

[MEL_Traveller]

BLR-SFO is about 90 minutes longer than QF8's DFW-SYD in terms of flying time (looking at flightaware for the last week it's been an average of 16.5 hours).

People just get into the groove of the flight. Sleeping helps. Sitting in economy you'd want some of those flight socks or your legs and feet would be getting pretty swollen.